Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	humane_a	person_n	subsistence_n	3,438	5	12.7058	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41614	A papist mis-represented and represented, or, A twofold character of popery the one containing a sum of the superstitions, idolatries, cruelties, treacheries, and wicked principles of the popery which hath disturb'd this nation above an hundred and fifty years, fill'd it with fears and jealousies, and deserves the hatred of all good Christians : the other laying open that popery which the papists own and profess, with the chief articles of their faith, and some of the principle grounds and reasons, which hold them in that religion / by J.L. one of the Church of Rome ; to which is added, a book entituled, The doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome, truly represented, in answer to the aforesaid book by a Prote	Gother, John, d. 1704.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.	1686 (1686)	Wing G1336; ESTC R21204	180,124	215

consists of two parts I. A general Complaint of the Papists being Misrepresented among us II. An Account of the Method he hath taken to clear them from these Misrepresentions I. As to the First Whether it be just or not must be examin'd in the several particulars But here we must consider whether it serves the End it is designed for in this place which is to gain the Reader 's good Opinion of their Innocency Not meerly because they complain so much of being injured but because the best Men in all Times have been mis-represented as he proves at large in this Introduction from several Examples of the Old and New Testament but especially of Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians But it is observable that when Bp. Iewel began his excellent Apology for the Church of England with a Complaint much of the same Nature and produced the very same Examples his Adversary would by no means allow it to have any Force being as he called it Exordium Commune which might be used on both sides and therefore could be proper to neither And although it be reasonable only for those to complain of being mis-represented who having Truth on their side do notwithstanding suffer under the Imputation of Error yet it is possible for those who are very much mistaken to complain of being mis-represented and while they go about to remove the Misrepresentations of others to make new Ones of their own And as the best Men. and the best Things have been mis-represented so other Men have been as apt to complain of it and the worst Things are as much mis-represented when they are made to appear not so bad as they are For Evil is as truly mis represented under the appearance of Good as Good under the appearance of Evil and it is hard to determine whether hath done the greater Mischief So that if the Father of Lies be the Author of Mis-representing as the Introduction begins we must have a care of him both ways For when he tried this black Art in Paradise as our Author speaks it was both by mis-representing the Command and the Danger of trangressing it He did not only make the Command appear otherwise than it was but he did very much lessen the Punishment of Disobedience and by that means deluded our first Parents into that Sin and Misery under which their Posterity still suffers Which ought to be a Caution to them how dangerous it is to break the Law of God under the fairest Colour and Pretences and that they should not be easily imposed upon by false Glosses and plausible Representations though made by such as therein pretend to be Angels of Light But although the Father of Lies be the Author of Mis-representing yet we have no reason to think but that if he were to plead his own Cause to Mankind he would very much complain of being mis-represented by them and even in this respect when they make him the Father of those Lies which are their own Inventions And can that be a certain Argument of Truth which may as well be used by the Father of Lies And the great Instruments he hath made use of in deceiving and corrupting Mankind have been as forward as any to complain of being mis-represented The true Reason is Because no great Evil can prevail in the World unless it be represented otherwise than it is and all Men are not competent Judges of the Colours of Good and Evil therefore when the Designs of those who go about to deceive begin to be laid open they then betake themselves to the fairest Representations they can make of themselves and hope that many will not see through their pretences If I had a mind to follow our Author's Method I could make as long a Deduction of Instances of this kind But I shall content my self with some few Examples of those who are allowed on both sides to have been guilty of great Errors and Corruptions The Arrians pleaded they were mis-represented when they were taken for Enemies to Christ's Divinity for all that they contended for was only such a moment of time as would make good the Relation between Father and Son The Pelagians with great success for some time and even at Rome complained that they were very much mis-represented as Enemies to God's Grace whereas they owned and asserted the manifold Grace of God and were only Enemies to Mens Idleness and neglect of their Duties The Nestorians gave out that they never intended to make two Persons in Christ as their Adversaries charged them but all their design was to avoid Blasphemy in calling the Blessed Virgin the Mother of God and whatever went beyond this was their Adversaries Mis-representations and not their own Opinions The Eu●ychians thought themselves very hardly dealt with for saying there was but one Nature in Christ they did not mean thereby as they said to destroy the Properties of the Humane Nature but only to assert that its Subsistence was swallowed up by the Divine and of all Persons those have no reason to blame them who suppose the Properties of one Substance may be united to another Even the Gentile Idolaters when they were charged by the Christians that they worshipped Stocks and Stones complained they were mis-represented for they were not such Ideots to take things for Gods which had neither Life nor Sense nor Motion in them And when they were charged with worshipping other Gods as they did the Supream they desired their Sense might not be taken from common prejudices or vulgar practices but from the Doctrine of their Philosophers and they owned a Sovereign Worship due to him that was Chief and a subordinate and relative to some Celestial Beings whom they made application to as Mediators between him and them Must all these Complaints now be taken for granted What then becomes of the Reputation of General Councils or the Primitive Christians But as if it were enough to be Accused none would be Innocent so none would be Guilty if it were enough to complain of being mis-represented Therefore in all Complaints of this Nature it is necessary to come to particulars and to examine with care and Diligence the Matters complained of and then to give Judgment in the Case I am glad to find our Author professing so much Sincerity and Truth without Passion and I do assure him I shall follow what he professes For the Cause of our Church is such as needs neither Tricks nor Passion to defend it and therefore I shall endeavour to state the Matters in Difference with all the clearness and calmness that may be and I shall keep close to his Method and Representations without Digressions or provoking Reflections II. But I must declare my self very much unsatisfied with the Method he hath taken to clear his Party from these Mis-representations For 1. He takes upon him to draw a double Character of a Papist and in the one he pretends to follow a certain Rule but not in the

Christ at York but the Priest there doth it therefore the Body of Christ at London is different from that at York or else the Conversion at London would be into the Body as at York But if not what is the substantial Term of this substantial Change where nothing but an accidental Mode doth follow If there be any such Term whether that must not be a production of something which was not before and if it be so Christ must have as many new Bodies as there are Consecrations 8. This makes that which hath no particular Subsistence of its own to be the Subject of a substantial Change for this is the condition of Christ's Body whatever its manner of Existence be after the Hypostatical Union to the Divine Nature For when Bellarmin Petavius and others of their greatest Divines undertake against Nestorius to explain the Hypostatical Union they tell us it consists in this that the human Nature loseth its proper Subsistence and is assumed into the Subsistence of the Divine Nature From whence I infer That the Body of Christ having no proper Subsistence of its own there can be no substantial Change into that which hath no proper subsistence but into that which hath and consequently the Change must be into the Divine Nature principally from whence it will follow the Elements losing their Subsistence upon Consecration the Divinity must be united hypostatically to them as to the human Nature and so there will be as many Hypostatical Unions as there are Consecrations And so this Doctrine not only confounds Sense and Reason but the Mysteries of Christ's Incarnation too Which I think is sufficient for this Head VI. Of Merits and Good Works HE believes Christ's Death and Passion to be ineffectual and insignificant and that he has no dependance upon the merits of his Sufferings or the Mercy of God for the obtaining Salvation but that he is to be sav'd by his own Merits And for this reason he is very zealously busie in fasting in whipping himself in watching in going in Procession in wearing Hair-shirts and using a thousand such like Mortifications And having done this he thinks himself not at all beholding to God for his Salvation and that to give him Heaven will be no favour It being now his due upon the account of his own meritorious Atchievements without any God-a-mercy to Christ's Passion or his Makers Goodness HE believes it damnable to say that Christ's Death and Passion is ineffectual and insignificant And that 't is the Doctrine of Devils to belive That he has no dependance for his Salvation upon the Merits of Christ's Sufferings or the Mercy of God but only upon his own Merits and good Works 'T is his Faith to believe That of our selves we are not sufficient so much as to think a good thought that the Grace by which we are justified is given us purely gratis upon the account of Christs Merits moreover that no Man how just soever can merit any thing either in this life or in that to come independant on the Merits Passion of Jesus Christ. Nevertheless that through the Merits of Christ the good Works of a just Man proceeding from Grace are so acceptable to God that through his Goodness and Promise they are truly meritorious of eternal Life And this he has learn'd from the Apostle 2 Tim. 4.8 where he is taught that there is a Crown of Justice which our Lord a just Judge will render at the last day not only to Saint Paul but also to all those that shall have fought a good sight and consummated their course kept the Faith and lov'd his coming Knowing therefore that at the day of Judgment he is to receive according to his Works He endeavours by good Works to make his Vocation and Election sure And in following this Counsel he thinks he no more offends against the fulness of the Merits of Christ's or God's Mercy than the Apostle does in giving it VI. Of Merits and good Works FOr the true stating this Controversie we are to observe 1. That we do not charge those of the Church of Rome That they belive Christ's Death and Passion to be ineffectual and insignificant and that they have no dependence on the Merits of his Sufferings or the Mercy of God for attaining Salvation but that they are to be saved only by their own Merits and Good Works as the Misrepresenter saith 2. We do not charge them with denying the Necessity of Divine Grace in order to merit or with asserting that they can merit independently thereupon 3. We do by no means dispute about the Necessity of Good Works in order to the Reward of another Life or assert that Christ's Merits will save Men without working out their own Salvation but do firmly believe that God will judg Men according to their Works The Question then is Whether the Good Works of a just Man as our Author expresses it are truly meritorious of eternal Life Which he affirms but qualifies with saying That they proceed from Grace and that through Gods Goodness and Promise they are truly meritorious But the Council of Trent denounces an Anathema against those who deny the Good Works of justified Persons to be truly meritorious of the increase of Grace and of eternal Life Here then lie the Points in difference 1. Whether such Good Works can be said to be truly meritorious 2. Whether those who deny it deserve an Anathema for so doing As to what relates to Gods Acceptance and Allowance and his Goodness and Promise we freely own all that he saith about it and if no more be meant what need an Anathema about this matter There must therefore be something beyond this when Good Works are not only said to be truly meritorious but we are cursed if we do not say the same To make any thing truly meritorious we must suppose these Conditions requisite 1. That what we pretend to merit by be our own free act 2. That it be not defective 3. That there be an Equality between it and the Reward due to it 4. That there be an Obligation in point of Justice to give that Reward to him that doth it And from these Considerations we deny that good Works even of justified Persons can be truly meritorious 1. It is granted by themselves That what is truly meritorious must be a free Act of the Person who doth it Now the good Works of justified persons cannot be said to be their own free Acts if the Power of doing them depend upon Divine Assistance and there was an antecedent Obligation upon them to perform them So that they can do nothing but what they are bound to as God's Creatures and their very Power of doing it is from the Grace of God If Men pretended to merit at anothers hands by what God gives there were some colour for it but to merit from God himself by what he gives us seems very incongruous If I ow a Man an 100 l.